Doctors could be like dentists

In these blogs I frequently read how many don't want anything from the government; that they want to be left to their own initiative;that they will buy/pay for what they need. OK!
Start with doctors telling every patient to pay for their entire bill at the time of service just like a dentist. We could still choose to carry insurance and fight it out ourselves with the company or not carry insurance. No gov't here. Doctors now have to create 4 different bills for each/procedure or visit i.e. the insured person,the cash person,the medicaid person and the medicare person. They will really save. It would be just like before medicare. Everyone pays up front or no service.

We could save money by not paying for our part of medicare and social security. That is about a 10% saving. We need to be really good savers because we need about 75% of our current income saved each year because that's what retirement costs.

Maybe save a little more because insurers have no reason to control costs other than every person in the US is so adept at individually negotiating with insurers that the companies will be easily cowed to reduce rates. If we live too long and didn't save enough, we could go to our grandkids who will be happy to pay for us.

Of course don't plan on getting a mortgage after you retire because only guaranteed income matters. Lenders want to see your retirement pension check and your social security amount. What you saved doesn't matter to them. Let's come up with more ways to eliminate government.

ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for
following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and
comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are
automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some
comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules,
click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.

Everytime I go to the doctors I ask how much something will cost. I also ask if it would make a difference if I paid cash. Sometimes it doesn't, but other times it does.
I negotiate EVERYTHING when I'm paying for something in cash.
Doctors don't like the hassle that comes with insurance companies any more than we do. They also have negotiated rates they have to go by.
Same thing happens with government run programs too, probably even more so (never a treat dealing with the government). Many doctors won't accept medicare for that reason, and many doctors won't accept certain insurances either.

My spouse just went to the dentist a few months ago to get a cleaning and to have a couple wisdom teeth pulled. That was the last visit to the dentist before we dropped dental coverage off my spouses insurance. We asked up front what the cost would be and what the insurance covered. After spending several minutes trying to figure it out, we asked what it would cost us if we simply paid cash.
The cost went down quite a bit.

I think most people would still need some type of insurance for a major illness, accident, or some other catastrophe. But a basic catastrophic-type insurance plan is pretty inexpensive, and it would cover people from bankruptcy. It would also cover taxpayers from picking up the tab.

If we had a pay-as-you-go system, I believe it would bring cost down significantly. Doctors could provide price sheets for different services and people could shop around.
That would force competition to provide the best service and fair prices.

There are plans for dental insurance and we have one. There are different kids so you do gave to shop.

The question is, since so many people do not have dental insurance and have to negotiate with the dentist or set up a payment plan. are people receiving the best care. Or are people waiting until the last minute and missing preventative care?

The same for doctors. At least, with insurance, they may be more likely to go in for prevention.

This is the thinking that needs to be done. Let's look at possibilities. What did work in the past? Everything related to healthcare instantly resorted to name calling, blame game, distrust and wild-accusations. People on all sides dug in and now we are at a stalemate. Hysteria has replaced rational thinking.

I have insurance and pay out of pocket $4000-$7,000 a year for insurance costs, med/dental bills and drugs. If we could have the simple choice of buying quality insurance or using the same money ourselves to pay bills, I could accept that.

All the gov't would have to do would be to prevent insurance companies from dropping anyone with pre-existing conditions or canceling a policy for anything other than non-payment.

If you have no money for insurance or bills then the gov't could pay and you would work in a gov't program several hours a week in lieu of money... required volunteering. If you don't then there is no help for you...tough love from the Feds.

Why not have everyone pay into a compulsory fund. Have employers collect the money. That fund pays for the national health system. People who need treatment don't even have to think about how much it's going to cost. People go for treatment earlier, preventative measures cut down on later long term care/cost.

Insurance companies are taken out of the loop. Drug companies can concentrate on making drugs, and not have to spend millions on advertizing. Doctors, dentists and hospitals can concentrate on what they are supposed to do, and not have to spend milions on advertizing.

Are we forgetting the role of health insurers in this debate? Some are already hurting because they've lost premium-paying customers due to rising unemployment. United Health only did fairly well recently because of their (government subsidized) presence in Medicare Advantage policies. Is it any wonder they (and their Lewin Group) are fighting so hard to make sure that the Advantage subsidies don't go away? Anyway, my point is that if everyone suddenly decides to pay for their own care, insurers will lose big, which means that premiums for catastophic-type coverage will increase big and maybe payouts would be affected.

Personally, I would do better under spedteech's pay-for-your-own scenario because I am paying more into Medicare annually than I am actually using. I don't have the Part D drug component, because I don't regularly take anything more than aspirin and am willing to assume the risk and the penalty for covering myself. But, you know, there are quite a few people who have shared their health care situations here, and they might not fare as well. And I am betting that at least half of the gray hairs who tea-partied with Tom Davis yesterday wouldn't go for any alteration in their Medicare either. Talking to some of those people confirms what I said a while ago about people rejecting government "interference" until they need it.

I like the tone of this thread though, so please keep it going.

"... the fundamental test of a society is how it treats the least powerful among us." --- Edward Moore Kennedy, August 1992

So simple it couldn't possibly work, LDG. :>) I like it, but when you throw around terms like "national health system" you are just asking for trouble. Nope, we'd rather argue for a hundred years and then end up with something that still doesn't get the job done because the U.S. is, after all, a "capitalist country". LOL.

I am absolutely convinced that, aside from the insurance company profit issue, a lot of the resistance has everything to do with not wanting President Obama or the Democrats to have any kind of a win. My mother used to call that kind of attitude "cutting off your nose to spite your face."

As you said, it isn't really that difficult a problem to solve. We're just making it hard.

"... the fundamental test of a society is how it treats the least powerful among us." --- Edward Moore Kennedy, August 1992

One of the debates with ourselves in any insurance purchase is will we get something back for our money.

As one comedian put it, life insurance is a policy that we bet we will die early and get more money back than we put in. But only the beneficiary gets to laugh on who won.

As for car and home insurance, we buy it because it is a part of the deal if we buy one. But on a home, we pay and pay and may never make a claim. Anyone who has a disaster and has to make a claim will say it was worth it.

As for health insurance, none of us will live a full life time and not need medical care. The older we get, the more we will need it. And then the young married couples with birthing costs. And the children do get sick.

Lots of people who are healthy think it is a waste of money. So we have 40 year old people having a triple bypass. About a hundred thousand dollars. Would this be worth the premiums?

And then there are healthy young people who contract cancer. Same deal.

Problem is that there is no way to predict a disaster. And medical bills to an uninsured can be a disaster.

Paying as you go is an option, but then you have to pay the "retail" prices. Under insurance company plans, each patient gets the advantage of being in a group with discount prices. Even a major procedure like a bypass is a cheaper overall price because of the group rate than if you went in under pay as you go.

Pay as you go could also be a problem in an emergency situation. Supposed you had the symptoms of a stroke and ended up in the emergency room. Of course they will treat you regardless, but at sometime, someone will visit you in your nice hospital room before you are released and ask how do you want to pay your 80,000.00 bill? Cash, check or credit card? You say you don't have the money, so they get you to fill out a financing agreement and one of the finance companies will finance it for 5 years at at an exorbitant rate. Is this what you want to deal with lying there recovering?

Paying health premiums is a pain, but we have few choices in the long run. A necessary evil like paying taxes.

There probably are people out there who would not want Obama to win, no matter what he proposed. But that is common no matter who was POTUS. That could be said in any previous administration.

And we have the extremists from both sides making headlines.

But the uproar started when the first details of the health plan was publicized. As a result, the bills in congress has been constantly rewritten and the most onerous either deleted or reworded. The incident with Joe Wilson resulted in Baucus closing the loop hole.

And the process goes on as the evolution of better legislation takes place. Thanks to our communications and media, we can all participate in the democratic process.

Granted that some of the protests get dramatic, but they get their point across and the politicians are listening.

if we do some very laborious and boring reading of the HR Bill 3200, aka the Health Care Reform Bill..... find the part where yes, it does say that illegal immigrants et al cannot use this program etc BUT.... and this is a BIG BUT.... the Bill also says that it is un-constitutional and unlawful for anyone to ask for proper documentation for determining residency status!
Is that a load of crap or what!!! Thats one of those small and fine print items the Dems leave out of their conversations about this.
The Bill is terrible.... theory is good, its writing is yucky. there needs to be lots and lots more to fine tune this puppy. Both sides need to get over their issues and get it fixed or get their backsides out of Washington and lets put someone in there who can.
The very first thing that should be done is all public servants should have the same health care as those of us out here busint gour tails day in and day out... not the fruity-tooty glamour plan they all have, and yes--- thats available online to see as well.

Could someone identify what amendment to the Constitution says that those in authority cannot ask for proper documentation to determine residency? I am not challenging the statement or that it's part of HR3200 but would like to know, please.

The people responding to this blog have been far superior to what I read in the vox. Here I learn and get info. I may not agree but it is so far superior to the abomination that is the vox and the hatred in letters to the editor that it gives me pause and concern to question where we chose to live.

Comments are welcome, so long as they are civil. A Facebook account is required. Abuse may result in the commenter being permanently blocked. Personal attacks are strictly prohibited. We reserve the right to remove any comments at any time.